Anti Cycling Legislators in Aus hit a new low.

check_six

Jawgap wrote: »

'stralia!!!

Australia senator Malcolm Roberts calls climate change a UN conspiracy

He'd feel at home with our own boyos, so! Danny Healy Rae tackles climate change

(I'm just curious, does anyone know what DHR's angle is here, normally it's far more transparent eg. run pub, want drink driving okayed for my drinkers, etc.)

Chuchote

check_six wrote: »

He'd feel at home with our own boyos, so! Danny Healy Rae tackles climate change

(I'm just curious, does anyone know what DHR's angle is here, normally it's far more transparent eg. run pub, want drink driving okayed for my drinkers, etc.)

No profit in wind farms? (Beating my familiar drum, if wind farm owners offered free electricity at normal home level for first 10 years to homes within a kilometre of a turbine, objections would magically disappear.)

magicbastarder

them intellectuals in dublin are not stealing our wind to make the electricity for their fancy macchiato coffees.

tomasrojo

On the subject of the Australian Senate, Leyonhjelm was returned. He was the most vocal senator at the anti-Nanny State committee, with a particular emphasis on helmet laws.

Not sure he can do that much, but he might get a final report of that committee out.
http://www.cycle-helmets.com/leyonhjelm-helmets.html

Jawgap

check_six wrote: »

He'd feel at home with our own boyos, so! Danny Healy Rae tackles climate change

(I'm just curious, does anyone know what DHR's angle is here, normally it's far more transparent eg. run pub, want drink driving okayed for my drinkers, etc.)

Maybe if you had an earth moving/civil engineering business you'd want people to believe that climate change was beyond humankind's control and that the only thing to do would be to build sea and flood defences

eeeee

Pointing out their ridiculousness makes them stronger...there is no hope

tomasrojo

Lastly, no cyclists in the world have had it tougher than our siblings in New South Wales, Australia. Stratospheric helmet fines, assaults, exploding smartphones... But now it seems that at long last they stricken a blow for freedom, as they have finally won the right to stand up while pedaling uphill

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2016/08/and-were-back.html

EDIT: Had a look at the original article. Remarkably, these laws also exist, though they seem to be completely unenforced:

a $298 fine in NSW for waving at a friend out of a car window, while leaving your car unlocked when you are more than three metres away from the vehicle could cost you $99.

http://www.executivestyle.com.au/common-sense-change-to-a-cycling-road-rule-gqjtgl

tomasrojo

More on NSW:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/aug/24/sydney-australia-war-cyclists-fines?CMP=share_btn_link

AUS$531(about €360) makes that an expensive bike ride. The bell bit is especially notable. You can get fined in many jurisdictions for not having one, but not that sort of money.

As Bike Snob NYC pointed out before, these sums are comparable to the fine received by a man in Australia who threatened cyclists with a knife.

Gray insisting that this will tackle cyclist injuries may have merit; in that, if each bike trip has the potential to cost hundreds of euro, I'd do far fewer of them.

Chips Lovell

I'm always amazed at how Australia has embraced cycling as a sport but still has a thoroughly backward attitude to cycling as a mode of transport.

Anyone I know who's cycled as a commuter down under has found it a thoroughly unpleasant experience.

tomasrojo

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I'm always amazed at how Australia has embraced cycling as a sport but still has a thoroughly backward attitude to cycling as a mode of transport.

The UK is, as far as I know, a lot better than Australia in cultivating utility cycling, but they're one of the worst in Europe. And yet are a titan in competitive cycling now.

Chips Lovell

I've only got London to go on, but I found it great to be honest.

tomasrojo

Yeah, I think it's more outside London that it's regarded as unpleasant. Manchester has a bad reputation. Not NSW-style bad, naturally. I haven't cycled in either country, so what do I know.

I suppose what I was getting at was the cycling participation levels (as in everyday cycling), which are low for a Northern European country. They're fairly high in London though. Very high in some places, I think.

CramCycle

I done a few Audaxes in Wales and they were all great but then went over with a friend from there. Brought me through the Valleys and along a few A roads. I consider myself hardened but the comparison between the two experiences was incredible. Life in your hands, but very un PC like, my colleague pointed out that you could link it with very specific areas, as my mother would say, the kids don't have a hope.

I have always found London lovely to cycle in, having lived there 30years ago and visiting more recently.

tomasrojo

It's interesting to hear that you both enjoyed London so much. I've never cycled there, so the only thing I hear about it is from social media, where much of the discourse is very negative.

Social media may not be an accurate picture of the world. Well, I never.

magicbastarder

CramCycle wrote: »

Brought me through the Valleys and along a few A roads.

having driven on A roads in england, i wouldn't be in any great hurry to cycle on them.

tomasrojo

On the hair-raising A roads, I saw figures (don't know where he got them) a campaigner from Scotland had that the UK's urban back roads have about the same risk level as equivalent roads in the Netherlands (slightly better actually: 8 deaths/billion km versus 12), but that the rural main roads in the UK are up at 170 deaths/billion km.

The slightly better death rate in the UK on urban back roads may be down to there being far fewer children and old people on bikes there, but it sounds ok anyway.

Lemming

CramCycle wrote: »

I done a few Audaxes in Wales and they were all great but then went over with a friend from there. Brought me through the Valleys and along a few A roads. I consider myself hardened but the comparison between the two experiences was incredible. Life in your hands, but very un PC like, my colleague pointed out that you could link it with very specific areas, as my mother would say, the kids don't have a hope.

Speaking for what bits of South Yorkshire I've cycled around (Rotherham, Sheffield, Peak District), some of the A roads I would not cycle on. Most are fine, but there's one or two that I drive regularly enough that I just would not do them on a bike; and have only rarely witnessed cyclists braving said roads.

Sheffield is fairly bike-friendly (hardly surprising given the Peaks are next door ... ) although some of the road surfaces in general are rubbish and the cycle lanes aren't always joined up, but the council does have a working relationship with cycle-advocacy groups.

Chips Lovell

tomasrojo wrote: »

It's interesting to hear that you both enjoyed London so much. I've never cycled there, so the only thing I hear about it is from social media, where much of the discourse is very negative.

Social media may not be an accurate picture of the world. Well, I never.

Anyone who complains about cycling in London should be punished with transportation to Australia.

Jawgap

tomasrojo wrote: »

Yeah, I think it's more outside London that it's regarded as unpleasant. Manchester has a bad reputation. Not NSW-style bad, naturally. I haven't cycled in either country, so what do I know.

I suppose what I was getting at was the cycling participation levels (as in everyday cycling), which are low for a Northern European country. They're fairly high in London though. Very high in some places, I think.

I found Manchester ok to cycle around - about on a par with Dublin. London I found grand and Newcastle was great except for the hills!!!! Northern Pennines, North York Moors, the Lakes - all superb cycling country, in my experience.

I've also cycled in Bath which was my favourite spot, but in line with other people's experiences I tended to avoid the A roads, I think too many regard them as motorways and drive accordingly on them.

tomasrojo

Newcastle is a really attractive city. Spectacular. Why this isn't more widely known is beyond me. As a consumer of British media, before I went there the impression I had was that Newcastle was most notable for its weather-resistant women.

I stayed in Ascot for the best (or worst) part of a week, doing a course. I walked from my hotel to the training centre every day, because it was the summer. Took about an hour. It looked idyllic for cycling, until a car passed at eye-popping speed. Don't think they have many cyclists. No walkers either. Never met another person walking anywhere there in the semi-rural Millionaire's Row bit.

Undercover Elephant

I commuted by bike in London 20 years ago during tube strikes. It scared the bejesus out of me. Was back there a few weeks ago and astonished by the sheer number of bikes. This is probably not wholly unrelated to the £8/day congestion charge and the two grand annual Oyster cards. And for the most part, the cyclists were very happy to assert themselves on the roads, and the motorists gave them the time and space they needed. It's a huge change. Perception tends to lag if you live in it all the time.

Jawgap

tomasrojo wrote: »

Newcastle is a really attractive city. Spectacular. Why this isn't more widely known is beyond me. As a consumer of British media, before I went there the impression I had was that Newcastle was most notable for its weather-resistant women.

......

Go for the weather resistant women.....stay for the cycling:)

Did a chunk of the Hadrian's Wall cycle - a grand ol' spin! Surprised it wasn't more popular.

tomasrojo

I really liked Segedunum as well. That's a nice part of the world generally.

Chuchote

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

I commuted by bike in London 20 years ago during tube strikes. It scared the bejesus out of me. Was back there a few weeks ago and astonished by the sheer number of bikes. This is probably not wholly unrelated to the £8/day congestion charge and the two grand annual Oyster cards. And for the most part, the cyclists were very happy to assert themselves on the roads, and the motorists gave them the time and space they needed. It's a huge change. Perception tends to lag if you live in it all the time.

I think it's happened more suddenly than that, with the huge building project making protected cycle lanes all over the city, as well as the London version of Dublin Bikes.

tomasrojo

Don't think this has been posted anywhere yet.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/nov/22/fewer-people-are-cycling-in-sydney-the-nsw-government-must-be-pleased

Cycling rates, unsurprisingly, appear to have declined in NSW.

Ferrari3600

I'm not sure about other parts of the UK, but in some parts of Scotland they have single track roads (even some A-roads are single track!):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-track_road

Daunting enough for drivers not familar with them, let alone cyclists!

2 Wheels Good

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

I'm not sure about other parts of the UK, but in some parts of Scotland they have single track roads (even some A-roads are single track!):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-track_road

Daunting enough for drivers not familar with them, let alone cyclists!

So you've never cycled/driven in west Cork/Kerry?

CramCycle

2 Wheels Good wrote: »

So you've never cycled/driven in rural Ireland

FYP

Roadhawk

tomasrojo wrote: »

Don't think this has been posted anywhere yet.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/nov/22/fewer-people-are-cycling-in-sydney-the-nsw-government-must-be-pleased

Cycling rates, unsurprisingly, appear to have declined in NSW.

Clearly the raise in fines was to tackle ongoing issues and ultimately the top offenders will stop cycling for financial reasons leaving only the law abiding elite on the roads. We might see it as harsh but it one way to get s**t done.

They are equally as harsh on motorists with fines and bans.

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

They are equally as harsh on motorists with fines and bans.

proportionally or equally?

DirkVoodoo

Roadhawk wrote: »

Clearly the raise in fines was to tackle ongoing issues and ultimately the top offenders will stop cycling for financial reasons leaving only the law abiding elite on the roads. We might see it as harsh but it one way to get s**t done.

They are equally as harsh on motorists with fines and bans.

Have you cycled in Australia? It's not pleasant and the attitude there is a more extreme version of what we have here, that cyclists are poor, tax avoiders and just shouldn't be on the car-roads.

I didn't get a single fine when I was there, but every day was a dance with death, and I'm not exaggerating, drivers don't really care at all that you're on a bike, they will happily cut you up, pass to close or worse.

I worked in a bike shop there, the majority of customers considered cycling "dangerous", because it was inherently so (like sky diving or scaling a skyscraper) and not because the attitude from motorists was that they could drive how they liked and if a cyclist got in the way, well they shouldn't have been there to begin with.

That's nothing to do with fines. That's a culture that's been beaten into Australians for the last 20 years. Play with your toys in designated areas and make sure you have all the necessary safety equipment.

CramCycle

Roadhawk wrote: »

They are equally as harsh on motorists with fines and bans.

This statement is unequivocally incorrect.

catbear

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

That's nothing to do with fines. That's a culture that's been beaten into Australians for the last 20 years.

I would posit that it goes back to the post war urban sprawl where once owning a car became mostly attainable using a bicycle was more a signifying of poverty and widely shunned as a sign of failure.

I really can't think why else they're so pathologically adverse to cyclists there.

Then there's the inverse position of cycling now being a rebellion thing because it's so despised.

There really isn't any middle ground, everyone is either a car nazi or a velodrome warrior mad max style, simply cycling has become a statement far removed from its most basic purpose.

Roadhawk

CramCycle wrote: »

This statement is unequivocally incorrect.

That may be your perception however their list of fines associated with motorists are in my view equally as harsh on drivers as they are on cyclists.

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/index.cgi?fuseaction=demeritpoints.browsehandler&category=Fine+amount&offence=

PeadarCo

Roadhawk wrote:

That may be your perception however their list of fines associated with motorists are in my view equally as harsh on drivers as they are on cyclists.

That is the problem. If your interested in road safety your always going to target driver's more given cars and motor vehicles are an actual danger to other road users.

In general or at least in Ireland anyway cyclists are at worst a nuisance to other road users. Most of the danger from poor cycling impacts the actual user of the vehicle. But you already know this as myself and other posters have supplied the relevant supporting information countless times in previous posts in other threads.

CramCycle

Roadhawk wrote: »

That may be your perception however their list of fines associated with motorists are in my view equally as harsh on drivers as they are on cyclists.

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/index.cgi?fuseaction=demeritpoints.browsehandler&category=Fine+amount&offence=

The perception is not the fine, it is the perception that they are targeting cyclists in a disproportionate manner both via targeted policing or by lack of enforcement of other relate-able or more serious road traffic infractions by other road users.

seamus

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Have you cycled in Australia? It's not pleasant and the attitude there is a more extreme version of what we have here, that cyclists are poor, tax avoiders and just shouldn't be on the car-roads.

Saw that here when I started a new job and was doing the induction bit. A woman from our Oz office was over going through the same programme. The finance people were doing their presentation and talking about the bike to work scheme.
The Aussie was stunned at the figure of €1,000. "Why would you need to spend that much on a bike?". When I asked what the process was for spending more (I threw out the figure of €2,500), her mouth literally opened. "If you had that money, why would you not just buy a car?". I explained that I already had two cars but cycling was far quicker for getting to work, and something I did as a hobby.
But she didn't get it. In her mind, bikes were cheap things that poor people bought to get around, and no sane person ever used one if they didn't have to.

I think I was as amazed as she was.

Roadhawk wrote: »

That may be your perception however their list of fines associated with motorists are in my view equally as harsh on drivers as they are on cyclists.

When the fine for not wearing a helmet is almost as much as not wearing a seatbelt, and someone without a bell can be fined as much as someone breaking the speed limit, you can't claim that the penalties are "equally harsh".

I agree that they're harsh in general, but the fines in place for two extremely inconsequential matters are bordering on draconian. €220 for not wearing a helmet. €75 for not having a bell.

tomasrojo

Speaking of proportionality in fines, bikesnobnyc wrote about an incident in Australia where a cyclist was threatened with a knife:

By the way, perhaps most disturbing of all, according to the video description this swashbuckling Parrothead--who threatened to knife someone for merely existing--was only fined $1,500.

That's only about three and a half times more than the fine in New South Wales for cycling without a helmet.

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2016/06/im-going-places-soon-literally-not.html

tomasrojo

And someone was fined the €75 fine for wheeling a bike without a bell. Wheeling it. Someone was fined for doing a track stand. Just flat-out weird policing.

tomasrojo

Roadhawk wrote: »

Clearly the raise in fines was to tackle ongoing issues and ultimately the top offenders will stop cycling for financial reasons leaving only the law abiding elite on the roads.

We will have fewer, but better Russians.

catbear

tomasrojo wrote: »

And someone was fined the €75 fine for wheeling a bike without a bell. Wheeling it. Someone was fined for doing a track stand. Just flat-out weird policing.

What's worse is I saw that happening in WA where rust bucket death traps don't have to go over the pits for an MOT as long as they keep renewing the rego on time!

The cops will only tag a car for an obvious fault but other wise the chassis could be about to disintegrate into a rust cloud but on appearance it's still considered road worthy.

This is also a state where there more houses with four registered cars than there are residences without cars!

Don't even get me started on the suburban drink driving problems where it was almost a weekly event where some V6 would end up wedged into someones house, sometimes with fatal consequences.

But oh no, walking a bicycle without a bell is a danger to the public safety!

Seriously fcuked up priorities in that carmagedom.

Glad I left that dump.

John_Rambo

PeadarCo wrote: »

That is the problem. If your interested in road safety your always going to target driver's more given cars and motor vehicles are an actual danger to other road users.

In general or at least in Ireland anyway cyclists are at worst a nuisance to other road users. Most of the danger from poor cycling impacts the actual user of the vehicle. But you already know this as myself and other posters have supplied the relevant supporting information countless times in previous posts in other threads.

Wrong.

Cars are a much bigger nuisance.

They cause traffic jams.
They cause road damage.
They cause more accidents .
They cause more injuries and deaths.
They cause obstructions when they break down.
They spout harmful gasses and pollute.

CramCycle

John_Rambo wrote: »

Wrong.

Cars are a much bigger nuisance.

They cause traffic jams.
They cause road damage.
They cause more accidents .
They cause more injuries and deaths.
They cause obstructions when they break down.
They spout harmful gasses and pollute.

I think you missed the point of the post. Being a minor nuisance is not something to be concerned about when you think of them relative to the bigger issues.

John_Rambo

CramCycle wrote: »

I think you missed the point of the post. Being a minor nuisance is not something to be concerned about when you think of them relative to the bigger issues.

Yeah, you're right, I did.

tomasrojo

The New South Wales Government confirmed today that it will not be bringing in mandatory photo ID for bicycle riders.

http://cycle.org.au/articles/index.php?page=223

They're keeping the stiff fines though. And why not?

The NSW Go Together road safety campaign has resulted in less than $5,000 in fines issued to motorists for failing to give adequate distance when passing bicycle riders. During the same period $1,333,250 in fines have been issued to bicycle riders.

CramCycle

tomasrojo wrote: »

http://cycle.org.au/articles/index.php?page=223

They're keeping the stiff fines though. And why not?

Has to be a trick, all Australians know that only the poor ride bicycles. Poor people don't have money and do not deserve the respect of good citizens (Australian government, 2002). Therefore they can't have had paid over that amount of money, unless they stole it, which they probably did, because they were drunk or Irish or Aboriginal (Victoria legislature, 2012). Therefore all people on bicycles should be arrested or shot on sight (NSW Police force, 2017).

tomasrojo

Are those real quotes? (Apart from the 2017 one!)

Chips Lovell

Cyclists? Flaming galahs!

buffalo

Via bike snob: http://www.bluemountainsgazette.com.au/story/4341836/festival-fine-fuss/

A Blackheath cyclist has been hit with a $750 fine for “reckless” riding and not wearing a helmet in the annual Blackheath rhododendron street parade.

...

Ms Giddey said the committee was yet to come to an official position over the fine, but if people had a problem with the new protective measures they “should take it up with the police … or write to the people in ISIS.”

Yep, blame ISIS.

Zillah

Weepsie wrote: »

An MP wants to use Strava to catch speeding cyclists

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/australian-mp-strava-data-action-against-speeding-cyclists-49356/

but when someone whizzes past wearing lycra on a bike really fast they can find it really intimidating and feel unsafe

Yes, the lycra is entirely relevant to the situation and not part of your demented prejudice against a form of transport.

Honestly what the fuck is wrong with Australia?